Ghostrider Posted July 26, 2011 Report Share Posted July 26, 2011 ^^ Aye, he wasn't included on the original list yesterday, but I see what I assume is him included now at #21. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickB Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 I was just looking at the court list. Its going to be a busy day in the court.I thought about going and watching him in court but by the look of the list its going to be packed already.So, anyone planning to go along to watch him? personaly I will just wait for Shetland news and The Shetland Times to put the Court reports on thier Websites.Somehow I dont think the Sheriff will accept his claim that the court has no authority in Shetland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickB Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 No change on his site where he has been suggesting a likely time slot of 09:45.09:45 is actualy the time everyone who has a court case on the day has to be at the court. With the amount of cases being called today it is possible that his case could be later in the day, possibly even in the afternoon.Im not sure how they decide which order to call the cases up before the Sheriff, but the order on the court listings is just an alphabetical list of names. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinner72 Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Somehow I dont think the Sheriff will accept his claim that the court has no authority in Shetland. I am curious to see how the court decides to play this. After all, they must be well aware that Stuart will then ask for proof of authority (or something similar) which is where it may get interesting. Or they may just delay the case for months on end... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Somehow I dont think the Sheriff will accept his claim that the court has no authority in Shetland. I am curious to see how the court decides to play this. After all, they must be well aware that Stuart will then ask for proof of authority (or something similar) which is where it may get interesting. Or they may just delay the case for months on end... I think that it is simple enough - the court has been asked to rule on his motoring offences and not its own jurisdiction. I would expect the sheriff to only look at the issue presented before him. I, personally, think that there are enough holes in Hill's 'research' to discount the majority of his claims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hillsidevoe Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Somehow I dont think the Sheriff will accept his claim that the court has no authority in Shetland. The court must prove jurisdiction before the case can commence,look at any court hearing defence papers and on them you will find the defendants right to challenge jurisdiction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Somehow I dont think the Sheriff will accept his claim that the court has no authority in Shetland. The court must prove jurisdiction before the case can commence,look at any court hearing defence papers and on them you will find the defendants right to challenge jurisdiction. The court can prove jurisdiction by the fact that in 1469 the land that is the Shetland isles became part of King James III's kingdom. The land is therefore part of Scotland. Also Every four years the people of Shetland willingly and without force elect (in a democratic ballot) people to represent them as BRITISH CITIZENS in the Palace of Westminster and in a separate ballot in the Scottish Parliament as SCOTTISH CITIZENS. As the majority of those who are of legal age to vote are registered to do so it is the will of the majority to be governed in such a way. Therefore the laws of Scotland are in effect. I would like to know if Mr. Hill is claiming his British State Pension. If he is, should he not be locked up as he has no right to it as he is not a British Citizen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 I am curious to see how the court decides to play this. After all, they must be well aware that Stuart will then ask for proof of authority (or something similar) which is where it may get interesting. Or they may just delay the case for months on end...I couldn't attend this morning due to an appointment, but did pop along at 13:00 to see if he'd been processed yet. By chance he left the building as I rounded the gate. He said that he'd been asked to get in the dock. To this he asked if by doing so he would be acknowledging jurisdiction. This bit repeated itself a few times and then he was told to come back at 14:00 today after the other cases had been dealt with. I am tempted to go along for the spectacle, he has even brought "interesting" clothes. Oh yes, and he also said he'd driven to the court in a third "consular vehicle". Tie-wise he'd chosen to wear a Lifeboat tie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nineinchnails Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 I am curious to see how the court decides to play this. After all, they must be well aware that Stuart will then ask for proof of authority (or something similar) which is where it may get interesting. Or they may just delay the case for months on end...I couldn't attend this morning due to an appointment, but did pop along at 13:00 to see if he'd been processed yet. By chance he left the building as I rounded the gate. He said that he'd been asked to get in the dock. To this he asked if by doing so he would be acknowledging jurisdiction. This bit repeated itself a few times and then he was told to come back at 14:00 today after the other cases had been dealt with. I am tempted to go along for the spectacle, he has even brought "interesting" clothes. Oh yes, and he also said he'd driven to the court in a third "consular vehicle". Tie-wise he'd chosen to wear a Lifeboat tie. that will be this car http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/6727/019qlj.jpg' alt='019qlj.jpg'> Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/img] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teenie3 Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 If you're there EM, keep wis updated! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 I couldn't resist and did go. Never having been in the courtroom before it was all quite an interesting novelty. Mr Hill was called and again he tried to get clarification as to whether his coming forward had any effect with respect to acceptance or non-acceptance of the court's jurisdiction. The Sheriff was having none of this and repeatedly laid down the line that if Mr Hill wished to say anything to him he had to be in the correct place and he could not address the court from the public space. Mr Hill was consequently unprepared to do so, but the Sheriff gave him the ultimatum that he either questioned the court's jurisdiction from the correct place, or else he'd be jailed on the spot. The Sheriff also took quite a dim view of Mr Hill's choice of clothing and wished to know why he was so dressed. He had chosen to wear a black gown similar (though home made) to those worn by the court officials. He also had a judicial wig with him, but wasn't wearing it during the hearing. The charges were then mentioned whereupon Mr Hill questioned jurisdiction. The Sheriff asked for a precise statement of Mr Hill's reasons for questioning jurisdiction. These were the allegations that Shetland has never been part of Scotland, the UK, or the EU. The Sheriff noted the response and stated that these would be dealt with at a hearing at 11:00 on 16th Aug. He also told Mr Hill that he was not going to allow him to appear wearing the gaffa edged gown at that hearing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveh Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 I would like to know if Mr. Hill is claiming his British State Pension. If he is, should he not be locked up as he has no right to it as he is not a British Citizen? He has every right to claim his pension if he has contributed via NHI contributions down the years. That would always be the case were he to live in Forvik or even Outer Mongolia.Besides, he presumably is claiming dual nationality anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teenie3 Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 Thanks for dat EM. Canna wait to see da photo o his ootfit in da Times (assuming there was somebody there we a camera!) Wonder if he drove his 3rd consular vehicle hame or was it impounded too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulb Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 I would like to know if Mr. Hill is claiming his British State Pension. If he is, should he not be locked up as he has no right to it as he is not a British Citizen? He has every right to claim his pension if he has contributed via NHI contributions down the years. That would always be the case were he to live in Forvik or even Outer Mongolia.Besides, he presumably is claiming dual nationality anyway.his defence would then fail if he claimed duel nationality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveh Posted July 27, 2011 Report Share Posted July 27, 2011 For what reason? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.